Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 04-06-2005 MINUTES CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION . WEDNESDAY,APRIL 6, 2005 7:00 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Chair Sand called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Present were Commissioners Ken Bezdicek, Elizabeth Modesette, Roberta Thompson, and Chair David Sand. Absent: Commissioners Clayton Larson and Clayton Zimmerman. Also present were Mayor Beverly Aplikowski, Community Development Director, Scott Clark, City Planner Peter Hellegers, and Recording Secretary Kathleen Altman. A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ON MARCH 2,2005. Commissioner Bezdicek moved, seconded by Commissioner Modesette to approve the . March 2, 2005 minutes as amended. The motion earned unanimously (4-0). PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING CASE #05-10 - RAMSEY COUNTY. RAMSEY COUNTY & PARTNERS PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY AND SHERIFF STATION. 1425 PAUL KIRKWOLD DRIVE; SIGN STANDARD ADJUSTMENT Mr. Hellegers stated applicants were requesting a Sign Standard Adjustment from the Signage Ordinance criteria for a freestanding monument sign. Staff made the following findings with regard to the Sign Standard Adjustment: 1. There are site conditions (traffic, readability for traffic moving 50+ mph) which require a sign adjustment to allow the sign to be reasonably visible from a street immediately adjacent to the site. 2. The sign adjustment will allow a sign of exceptional design or a style that has potential to enhance the area (one sign for several agencies) and is more consistent with the architecture and design of the site. 3. The sign adjustment will result in a sign that is inconsistent with the purpose of the . sign district and the zoning district in which the property is located. Staff recommended denial of the Sign Standard Adjustment based on the aforementioned findings for the following reasons: Ln ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION ~ APRIL 6, 2005 2 . I. While the sign would be visible from Highway 96, the amount of information required for sign and the speed of traffic on Highway 96 (which would increase the need larger text) may require a Sign Standard Adjustment. However, a smaller valiance from the Sign Ordinance Standards would still result in greater visibility and would be more consistent with the City's Sign Ordinance Standards. 2. The proposed sign is inconsistent with both the Civic Center Zoning District and Sign District 6 which anticipated more destination oriented facilities that would not require as much signage as the commercial zoning and signage districts. The proposed sign is much larger than allowed for any commercial zoning and signage districts in the City. Commissioner Bezdicek asked if the sign there now was the same size of the proposed sign. Mr. HeIIegers replied the new sign would be slightly shorter. Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:]2 p.m. Chair Sand invited the applicant to come forward and make comment. Bruce Thompson, Assistant Director Property Management Ramsey County, state he wanted to come to some kind of an agreement between the City and the County regarding sign age. He indicated the mock up sign that was presently there was not going to work. . He stated they did have an alternate sign he wanted to propose. He noted the goal in establishing a monument sign was visibility. He indicated letters of 10" and 6" were the ideal size and letters of that size would be visible by the traffic. He noted if they took those size letters and put in all of the letters they needed to that is what dictated the size of the sign. He stated they also had a goal of having the sign fit the area and the building. He indicated the colors on the sign would match the building and they would use leftover brick from the building and the aluminum would be colored exaetly the same as the metal on the building. Commissioner Tony Bennett, Ramsey County, presented to the Commission the proposed sign for their consideration. He indicated the sign would need a valiance and noted the City Hall sign was] I9 square feet, which was over the] 00 square foot limit imposed by the City and this sign had one name on it, while their sign would have many names on it. Commissioner Bezdieek asked how many square feet was the sign they were proposing. Mr. Thompson replied they were proposing a I69 square feet sign. Commissioner Modesette asked if there would be reconstruction of the holding pond. Mr. Bennett replied the holding pond would remain as it was and the sign would fit. Chair Sand asked how the new sign would be positioned. Mr. Bennett replied it would be perpendicular to Highway 96. He noted the new sign would be 72" high and 28 feet . long. Chair Sand asked why they had not seen this prior to tonight meeting when it was dated March 5. Mr. Thompson replied he believed the date was wrong and it should be dated April 5, not March 5. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 3 . Mr. Bennett stated this was an error on the drawing date because the finalization of the sign design was just made this week. Chair Sand stated it was difficult to make a recommendation when the Commission and staff had not had sufficient time to analyze this. Mr. Hellegers stated by slninking the sign in height, it would only be necessary to have one vanance. Mr. Thompson stated it was their intent to show the Commission that they were willing to look at some alternatives because the original sign did not work and they did not intend to not give the Commission or staff insufficient timc to look at this. Commissioner Bennett apologized for rushing this, but indicated he wanted to have the sign up for the Open House, which would be in the next 60 days. Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make comment. There were no comments made from the public. Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:26 p.m. . Commissioner Modesette stated she could see that a variance was necessary for this sign and she understood they had a lot of information to put on this, but the fact this was being rushed through, she was uncomfortable approving this tonight. She requested they see a mock up of this before it was finally approved. Commissioner Bezdicek stated he was surprised to see another proposal coming forward this evening and he had difficulty approving this without staff having suf~eient time to look at this and make a recommendation. Commissioner Thompson stated she wanted staff to be given sufficient time to look at this and give their recommendations. She stated the liked the materials and believed they needed this size of a sign, but had a concern about the metal on the sign due to headlights hitting it. She stated she was uncomfortable approving this tonight until staff had been gi ven more time to make their recommendations. Chair Sand noted a sign mock up was expensive, but if they could prepare a computer generated photograph that would be helpful. He agreed with all of the Commissioner's comments. He recommended tabling this motion pending receipt of further information and giving staff sufficient time to make a recommendation. Mr. Clark stated normally if this would be acted on tonight, this would be put on the . April 25 Council meeting agenda, so he would recommend if this was addressed at the Commissioner's meeting in May, this be put on the May 9 Council me~ting agenda, which would mean the applicant would only lose I] days. . ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 4 . Chair Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson, to recommend tabling Planning Case No. 05-10, Ramsey County, I425 Paul Kirkwold Drive (Ramsey County Public Works and Sheriff Station), Sign Variance for additional factual and visual information to give staff sufficient time to make a recommendation. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). B. PLANNING CASE 05-11: ROLAND KARJALAHTI, 1137 EDGEW ATER A VENUE: FRONT/SIDE YARD CORNER SETBACK VARIANCES Mr. Hellegers stated applicant was requesting a 5-foot front yard setback variance and a 10-foot side yard comer setback variance for the construction of a new single family detached house on the applicant's property at I 137 Edgewater A venue in Arden Hills. Staff recommended approval of the variance subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall file all necessary building pennits with the Building Official for approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. Building permit plans shall be submitted to the Building Official a minimum of two (2) weeks before the planned start of construction. 2. A drainage swale should be constructed along the western portion of the property to collect the drainage water flowing westward down the hill of the property and carry . the drainage toward the street. A revised grading the drainage plan showing this drainage swale shall require the approval of the Arden Hills City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building permits. 3. A revised grading and drainage plan showing the elevation of the first floor and basement and the surrounding property shall be submitted to the City and shall require approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any building pennits. 4. The applicant shall be required to plat the property prior to the issuance of any building permits. Chair Sand asked if condition four should have the applicant replat the property. Mr. Hellegers replied that was correct. Commissioner Thompson asked for an explanation of the drainage swale. Mr. Hellegers summarized the drainage swale for the Commission. Commissioner Modesette asked if the curb cut and concrete driveway would remain. Mr. Hellegers replied there should only be one access and so it should be removed. Chair Sand asked if the retaining wall that was currently there was close to where the new retaining wall was being proposed. Mr. Hellegers replied it appeared to be close. . Commissioner Modesette stated she was not certain the engineering was complete enough to run the water to the street. Mr. HelIegers replied it might need a little more space and he would have the City Engineer review this before it would go forward. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 5 Chair Sand asked if the neighbors concern had been addressed. Mr. Hellegers replied the . neighbors wanted to see the proposal and make sure the trees were preserved. Chair Sand asked if the trees on the Certificate of Survey were new plantings or were they existing vegetation. Mr. Hellegers showed the current aerial photograph and where the landscaping presently was located. He noted most of the trees on the Certificate were existing trees. Chair Sand asked if there had been any contact to the neighbor to the west regarding the drainage issues. Mr. Hellegers replied they had not been spoken to yet, but they were given notice of his proposal. Chair Sand opened the public hearing at 7:47 p.m. Chair Sand invited applicant to come forward and make comment. Roland Karjalahti, I137 Edgewater Avenue, stated presently they had a couple of retaining walls on the property, which would be redone and the reconfiguration of the retaining walls had not been decided on yet until he knew if the variance was approved or not, but he would work with City staff on these retaining walls. He noted with the new retaining walls, this would address any drainage issues. He stated he had spoken to the property owner to the west and he has not had any unusual flooding or drainage problems on this property. He indicated he had also spoken with the property owner to the north . about the trees and they definitely wanted to keep the trees to the north. He stated due to the pavement management project in the area, much of the landscaping in the front had been removed, but he wanted to put in more landscaping in the front. He asked if the City Zoning Ordinances required repIatting in this type of a situation. He noted in Shoreview they would not require a repIatting in this type of a situation. He indicated a full final plat procedure was very expensive and because of the proximity to Lake Josephine, the surveyor needed to follow certain State guidelines. He asked if replatting was absolutely necessary. He noted this was two platted properties, but one tax parcel. Chair Sand stated they would have to defer to staff as to whether or not this needed to be replatted. Mr. Hellegers replied during recent meeting with staff and the City Attorney this exact type of an issue was brought up and it was agreed upon that this process of platting was the correct procedure to follow. Chair Sand stated staff would not change recommendation number 4. Mr. Hellegers replied he believed this was the correct recommendation. Chair Sand stated he liked this plan and it was a beautiful house and he believed this would be an improvement to the neighborhood. Chair Sand invited anyone for or against the variance to come forward and make comment. . Dave Monson, I I75 Edgewater, stated these plans looked very nice and he was very much in favor ofthis proposal. There were no further comments made. ------ ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 6 . Chair Sand closed the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. Commissioner Bezdicek stated he understood staff's comments with respect to the replatting, but asked if there were any alternatives that would be acceptable to comply with the guidelines. Mr. Hellegers replied there was a lot line that would tun down the middle of the house and this was the reason they needed to have this replatted. He noted two alternatives they have in the Ordinance, did not apply to this type of a situation. He indicated he believed replatting would be the correct procedure. Mr. Clark stated they might be able to state in requirement 4 that the applicant should be required to replat or convey by minor subdivision, which would give staff the opportunity to reexam this. Commissioner Bezdicek, seconded by Commissioner Modesette, to recommend approval of Planning Case No. OS-II: Roland Katjalahti, I 137 Edgewater Avenue, Front/Side Yard Comer Setback Variances subject to the recommendations made in staff's April 6, 2005 and modifying recommendation four to read: The applicant shall be required to replat or convey by minor subdivision the property prior to the issuance of any building permits. The motion carned unanimously (4-0). . UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS A. PLANNING CASE 05-09: DAVID RADZIEJ AND ROGER SABOT, 4365 AND 4367 LEXINGTON AVENUE: DRIVEWAY VARIANCE. Mr. Hellegers stated the applicants have requested variances to allow them to maintain the existing shared driveway and add an additional driveway for each of the applicants' property in Arden Hills. He noted at the March, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny the requested variance to maintain the existing shared driveway and add one additional driveway for each of the properties. He stated the applicants have reviewed the Planning Commission's direction and have attempted to answer some of the Planning Commission's previous questions. Staff recommended approval of the request for variance to allow one new driveway at 4365 and one new driveway at 4367 while maintaining the existing shared driveway subject to the following conditions: J. The applicants shall submit Zoning Permits with plans to the Building Official a minimum of two (2) weeks before the planned start of construction. . 2. The applicants will require approval from Ramsey County for the cub-cuts prior to the installation of a new driveway. ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 7 3. The driveways shall be constructed within the City standards for driveway widths . of a 12 foot minimum and a 22 foot maximum. 4. There shall be at least 60 feet between each driveway access. 5. Auxiliary signage shall be installed which identifies the entry driv~ and the exit drives. 6. The access drives shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and County Traffic Engineer, installation of the access drives can only proceed after approval of the access drive design by both the City Engineer and County Engineer. 7. Parking shall comply with the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance requirements of no parking on any areas except for driveways and parking lots, and shall not have more than 4 vehicles parked on any driveway. Chair Sand stated it appeared applicants had addressed some of the concerns the Commission had last month. He asked if staff was comfortable with this new proposal. Mr. Hellegers replied he believed this was a better proposal than what had presented at the previous meeting. Chair Sand statcd it helped applicants included the photographs with the computer generated lines and thanked the applicants for these. . Commissioner Modesette asked how wide the existing driveway was. Mr. Hellegers replied the existing driveway was 19'. Chair Sand stated one of their concerns was if the new driveways were not allowed, then the existing driveway might have to be widened to allow cars to pass each other easily. Chair Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to recommend approval of Planning Case No. 05-09: David Radziej and Roger Sabot, 4365 and 4367 Lexington Avenue; Driveway VaJiances, subject to the seven conditions as outlined in staffs April 6, 2005 report. Commissioner Modesette asked if staff had received any further comments from the neighbors regarding the concerns with this additional driveway being added. Mr. Hellegers replied the neighbors had not becn notified of this meeting as it was not a public hearing, but he had checked with the City Engineer and he did not have a concern with this proposal and it also met the County requirements. The motion carried (3- I) (Commissioner Modesette opposed). B. DISCUSSION ON FENCE HEIGHT . Mr. Hellegers stated recently a resident inquired about amending the City's regulations for fence height. The resident had just constructed a red cedar fence which was 6 feet 6 inches in height with ornamental post caps somewhat higher still. Apparently, the materials are sent to the fence company pre-cut and when the frame is assembled the fences would he taller than the 6 foot height currently permitted. The resident stated the ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 8 red cedar fences are very attractive and with the regulations the way they currently were . the fences would likely not get built due to the extra cost to the residents to have the contractor reduce the height of pre-cut fence materials. The resident had provided copies of fence regulations from several metro cities which allow fence heights ranging from 6 feet 6 inches to 8 feet. , He indicated the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance allows fences in residential 4istricts to be built in the front yard area up to a maximum of 3 feet in height and fences in rear yards to be built up to a maximum of 6 feet. A Zoning Pcrmit is required prior to fence , construction. Building regulations would kick-in for fences above a height Of 6 feet (due to wind load, etc.). If the Planning Commission indicates the fence regulations should be amended staff would schedule a public hearing for the May 4 Planning Commission meeting and also bring Zoning Ordinance amendment language to that meeting. Commissioner Bezdicek stated he did not believe this walTanted discussion. Commissioner Thompson agreed and noted they had a procedure already set up and she believed the procedure should be followed. Chair Sand agreed. The Commission agreed to follow the procedure already established. . REPORTS A. Planning Commissioners None. B. Staff Mr. Clark updated the Commission on recent TCAAP matters. C. Council Member Mayor Aplikowski updated the Commission on reccnt City Council actions. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Thompson moved, seconded by Commissioner Bezdicek to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 p.m. The motion carried unanimously (4-0). .